In what circumstances will a prosecutor's hypothetical question during jury selection override the court's description of the burden of proof?

instructed the jury on several occasions on the correct standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt, and the jury was admonished if "the attorneys' comments on the law conflict with my instructions, you must follow my instructions." There is no reason to believe the prosecutor's insignificant hypothetical question during jury selection was considered by any juror as overruling the court's description of the burden of proof. (See People v. Morales (2001) 25 Cal.4th 34, 47-48 ["[t]he trial court emphasized this rule when, as stated, it instructed the jury to follow its instructions and to exalt them over the parties' arguments and statements"].)

The judgment is affirmed.